Setting aside Mr. Thwaites' heroic efforts and achievement for a moment, I would like to explore the vision I am trying to develop for a digital economy that I expect will develop between human communities which are separated from Earth by sufficient distance so that physical trading of artifacts is impractical.

The future I am considering would feature atom assemblers, and like 3D Printers of 2016, they would take a long time to build up objects atom by atom.

The time scale for fabrication of components would (presumably) be on the scale of plant growth, because plants are examples of atom assemblers.

It takes on the order of weeks to fabricate a twig, which is a moderately sturdy assembly of modest size.

As cited by Dr. Dartnell, consideration of sourcing of atoms is a necessary prerequisite for a successful digital economy. My guess at this point is that atom scale "extractors" will come into existence, to pull needed atoms from feed stock.

The intent of the vision I am attempting to put together is not to try to replicate a 2016 level civilization with just a few people, because while that may be possible in a few centuries, my guess right now is that a good estimate for the number of people who would be needed to sustain a reasonable replica would be on the order of 1,000,000.

Such a community would (should) be able to sustain such artistic endeavors as opera and symphony performances, as well as a reasonably rich athletic competitive environment.

Still, such a community might not be able to afford the waste we see in the "default" Earth civilization of 2016, represented by those who devote their lives to crime or similar destructive pursuits.

My guess is that the average citizen of the hypothetical 1,000,000 would accept responsibility for mastery or at least robust familiarity of some aspect of human knowledge bequeathed by the generations of Earth based learners, practitioners, documenters and teachers.

(th)

May every member of The Knowledge forum grow financially, intellectually, socially and beyond.

In this section Dr. Dartnell completes setup of a scenario following a major civilization ending catastrophe.

Thanks in large part to my having read "The Knowledge" and then begun to think about it subsequently, I've been noting how fragile are the comforts enjoyed by my neighbors and me, living in a good sized city in the United States of 2016.

In thinking ahead to the situation of a community on Mars just a few decades from now, I understand that the questions Dr. Dartnell posed in "The Knowledge" are immediately at hand, for those who are already engaged in planning for life on Mars.

The Wikipedia article cited above is apparently being actively updated.

The Further reading section shows six citations, the most recent of which is dated 2008.

I'll keep watching for signs that someone may be seriously thinking about what it will take to build a civilization on Mars that is comparable in quality to life on Earth in developed countries in 2016.

Dr. Dartnell closes the citation for this post with:

Begin Quotation:The remnants provide nothing more than a safety buffer to ease the transition to the moment when harvesting and manufacturing must begin anew.End Quotation.

Those who engage in planning for a "modern" civilization on Mars have the luxury (for the moment at least) of NOT having to worry about deterioration of the Earth civilization we presently experience.

Never-the-less, as I look out at the global scene today, it seems to me wise for more than a few people to join Dr. Dartnell in thinking about how to recreate civilization, whether on Mars or elsewhere.

(th)

May every member of The Knowledge forum grow financially, intellectually, socially and beyond.

Disaster management cycle uses to illustrate to the ongoing process by that governments, businesses as well as civil society plan for as well as reduce to the impact of disasters, react in the time of as well as right away following a disaster, as well as take steps to recover after the time of a disaster has occurred. Recovery as well as rebuilding are generally identified within the post-disaster phase. Thanks& regards,Lindsey nicoleDisaster Equipments|Refugee Tents

2016/12/19 Reference #1Page 6, Paragraphs at bottom extending to top of Page 7

In this section Dr. Dartnell reviews the challenge to survivors of a disaster, due to the distribution and varying quality of saved knowledge, as well as to the more recent problem of data not preserved in durable form.

Dr. Dartnell anchors the citation for this post with:

Begin Quotation:Even worse, ....., is not recorded on any durable medium at all.End Quotation.

For today's post, I would like to call attention to the panic of climate scientists in the United States government, who are facing the imminent danger of the inauguration of a man who is surrounded by people who apparently deny scientific knowledge altogether, unless it happens to support their preconceived (otherwise false) beliefs.

The article by Kim Palmer, originated with the Minneapolis Star Tribute.

It describes a sunken greenhouse constructed by volunteers in support of a church initiative.

Since the purpose and focus of this thread is to encourage potential authors to build their next work in Dr. Dartnell's forum, here is a topic that could (it seems to me) accumulate to the size of a book, over time.

(th)

May every member of The Knowledge forum grow financially, intellectually, socially and beyond.

All of these references are of an historical nature, and they are relevant to the project of rebuilding a civilization that has been lost.

I would like to note that page 207 describes an historical example of battery swapping. According to a recent report (probably broadcast on National Public Radio), a key reason why battery swapping is unlikely to become popular is that the battery cases of modern electric vehicles (such as Tesla) are built into the frame as integral components. Thus, while Tesla (for example) is able and willing to swap a battery at the end of its useful life, the integration of the battery case with the body of the vehicle means that the process is time consuming.

It is clear from the report that Mr. Musk and his team had solved the battery integration problem, and that it was feasible to swap batteries, but his tests with actual customers showed a very low level of interest.

However, the purpose of THIS post is to launch a call for participation in a project to develop all systems and subsystems that would be needed to recycle non-rechargeable batteries on Mars, or any other location away from Earth, where the global infrastructure that supports use of non-rechargeable batteries today on Earth would not be available.

What I am seeing today as components of a system are:

1) A process (probably atom assembly) to create non-chemical components of non-rechargeable batteries, such as the case, electrodes, seals2) A process (unclear if just ordinary chemistry) to create the electrolyte for the particular type of battery to be manufactured3) A process for assembly of the components and the electrolyte to create a finished battery4) A process for quality testing of each battery, and application of cosmetic coatings as desired

Related systems and subsystems would be needed to accept used non-rechargeable batteries for extraction of atoms of various kinds for storage and then re-use in later manufacture.

The entire set of systems and subsystems should be suitable for supervision by a single person, and thus suitable for an economy built to recreate the level of civilization extant on Earth in 2016 but located away from Earth, and populated by (about) 1,000,000 people.

As discussed in the Adam Smith thread here on The Knowledge forum, there should be a minimum of three separate operations to recycle and reproduce non-rechargeable batteries to insure capitalist competitive jockeying for customer patronage.

(th)

May every member of The Knowledge forum grow financially, intellectually, socially and beyond.